It just goes to prove that any popular software worth hacking that has security vulnerabilities will eventually have to deal with live working exploits.
What can I say? I pity the administrator that need "proof" to realize this. Straight to the "Security 101" class you go, as you should have before getting a job. Or if not having one, thank god for that.
As you can see, the facade that Firefox is the cure to the Internet Explorer security blues is quickly fading.
Here's the hard facts according to Secunia... IE 6: 19 of 85 unpatched issues, the most severe classed Highly Critical. Firefox 1.x: 3 of 22 unpatched issues, the most severe classed Less Critical. Opera 8.x: 0 of 7 unpatched issues.
I don't know about you, but as long as a product is auto-updating (which the Firefox 1.5 beta and onwards indeed is, like IE 6, and unlike Opera 8), what does it matter how many exploits are found? Isn't it how many issues you're affected by that matters?
Yes, this was a problem with Firefox before 1.5 as you can't excuse having to manually upgrade your browser while monitoring security sites (at least not from the audience Firefox is targeting), and that's why I recommend people to upgrade to 1.5 ASAP. The minor instabilities still present from being in beta isn't as bad as missing out security fixes.
Sparkle is vector based XAML system for doing applications that may have traditionaly been done in flash
It's primarly to do Windows apps though (to aid in developing for the new Windows Graphics Framework model). I rarely see Flash used for Windows application development. Sure, it happens, but far from often.
With my memory refreshed from that, it seems like Cairo is more of a vision than a product. I guess that's where I got into thinking it became Windows 2000, as it has some techs from it, although I stand corrected and you're right some got in as early as NT 4, but NT 4 never had a codename according to MS, and I haven't seen anything saying the WinFS service itself being delayed from NT4 to Vista.
Yeah, but Opera does that to people by switching to a different skin. Changing the UI is not worth a new OS release.
It's not the UI, it's how you work with your computer, to put it simple. I couldn't find where to place my documents in the appropriate way first. Opera? What do you mean? And I wasn't saying the UI alone warranted a new OS release. Please don't put words in my mouth.;-)
Ummm... isn't that just a rehash of "Recent Documents" in 98?
Recent documents is one of the virtual folders that exist, yes (although I don't recall the filters for that one, if it's now just actual *documents* or other files too), but you have a lot of such folders, and it's not really clear which contents belong to a single author or many either. It's often virtual folders in subfolders of other virtual folders as well. I think I'm starting to get it now with a "Library" virtual folder being for the local machine, and a "User's Files" for the user. But if you don't pay attention, you may be looking in a "Documents" virtual folder that covered all for the machine when you thought you were in one for just the user. Bah, it's hard to explain, and I think you need to use it yourself to see what I mean. The thing is that they're so flexible (unifying and splitting by author is just one of the fields, another folder can be "mp3 music of 2004", containing files only one user put in 10 different real folders). It's folders with an intelligence, and I can imagine that going completely over the head of many novices, especially if they don't set a filter right and have to call support wondering why they can't find their files in a folder.
A new indexing system is good, but again, that was something I was expecting in SP2.
OK, and some expected it in 2000, etc. I don't see your point here. When it do arrive, it still makes for a big change, no? Or is it a less of a big change for Windows users when they get it in 2006 instead of 2003? Most Windows users still haven't experienced this system, and that has to define how big change it'll appear to them after all.
But WinFX isn't even coming with Vista... its coming two years later in a patch that goes on Vista, XP AND 2000....
Yes, it's being backported to aid in the transition and early adopters. The intended platform for these techs are Vista though according to docs, and I'm pretty sure MS will do something to enforce that as well.
As for release estimates, yours seem a bit strange, as Microsoft released WinFX Beta 1 in parallel with Vista beta 1, and.NET 2.0 is going to get finished in November this year, which WinFX builds upon. I don't really see where the sudden delay would come from, and I'm reading Microsoft's statement as it'll have a similar schedule as Vista:
WinFX is Windows Vista's managed-code programming model, building on and extending the.NET Framework.
It wouldn't make much sense for them to release Vista's development model two years later. Microsoft has to want people to develop for their OS, right? Are you confusing with WinFS? That's been said to come later, and also being backported.
Yes, for reasons I posted before, I think Linux could gain some advantage over Windows even after Vista goes retail. It's an OS with so many changes, people won't exactly switch overnight.
As long as Linux devs can offer a desktop competitive with e.g. OS X pretty "soon" (hey, and hopefully better!), things could get a bit interesting, if it has a strong unified application suite. Newbies can easily get lost. And yeah, I still strongly believe it isn't there. I guess it has 4-5 years from now before Vista adoption can slowly start to kick in for real.
When Vista adopters have overcome its differences from other OS'es and got used to its incompatible application development, Linux could get a harder time if it hasn't moved on the OS usage share ladder by then.
I'm right now most curious in how KDE 4 / Plasma will end up working like. That seems to for once not be a simply basic and incremental desktop release for Linux.
This was a feature planned for Cairo, i.e. what ended up as Windows 2000. It wasn't planned for Windows 95. But still, yes, it didn't end up in 2K or in XP, but it's about to arrive now. So...? Priorities change, and I can easily see a major OS generation or two being skipped before returning on a concept. It's probably happening with all operating systems to some extent.
Well, beta 1 of WinFS has been released taking it out of its vaporware state, so I wouldn't say "can't make it". Last thing I heard it'll be available around the time of Vista's release, possibly shortly after.
I suppose you haven't used the latest versions of Vista? I was just doing it and is totally confused by the new Explorer UI, and I'm pretty used to working with Windows. I can't imagine what Vista similar to this form will do to my mom. When others seem to be trying to simplify, MS sure is going the other way.
For example, if you go to Documents from the Start Menu, you're seamlessly put in a virtual folder. Not really a physical one where the files are, but a folder based on a file search. The files there can be in several different places, but you don't really notice easily as the searches are now instnataneous thanks to the new indexer (a good thing in all this mess). So then you try to go to your *real* documents folder and find it's in a completely restructured place (hint: Documents and Settings is no more in Vista). And there you have the changes involved when you just try to go to a folder.
It's really, really, a lot of changes in this build, feels like more to me than going from NT4 -> 2000 actually.
And that's just the end-user thing. What's in there for devs? Well, an entirely new development API from scratch -- WinFX is there to succeed Win32, and it's anything but similar, don't even think of having it being backwards compatible. While Win32 was C libraries, this is.NET framework based. A side effect is that you can no longer develop in C++, in that case you need to use Managed C++, which is very much incompatible with regular C++, with even new keywords introduced like "gcnew" for "garbage collected new" and "^" for a garbage collected pointer, etc.
I'm actually starting to believe Microsoft may be introducing *too much* stuff in Vista at once for devs and end-users alike. To develop Windows Vista apps, you're best off in using Visual Studio 2005 (not out yet),.NET Framework 2.0 (not out yet), and three recently announced products which didn't even have a counterpart before. Then you can start developing Avalon (a new API) apps in XAML (a new language) and a.NET language of choice. No, simple C or C++ won't do it at all, it's totally incompatible. You need e.g. VB.NET, C#, J#, or Managed C++.
So don't come here and tell me there can't be much smaller changes.;-) This is an OS I think administrators will fear of rolling out due to its changes, not to speak of its new hardware requirements because it heavily uses the GPU as a desktop renderer (another not too tiny change btw).
Firefox usually end up with that behavior as well as domain names rank very highly on Google; with Firefox it's more like you get the additional benefit with some intelligence to it as well. If I for example wish to check the latest Firefox builds, I can just type burning edge, and it will take me to the actual site, and not www.burningedge.com. (which, of course, is an ad domain) If I on the other hand type arstechnica, it indeed takes me to www.arstechnica.com, just like Opera would.
Of course, there are rare exceptions, but the nice part is they're very rare, so I usually just end up benefitting from the extra advantages from its intelligence.
I'm not completely sure why you replied to my post, but if it was to say Slashdot is a blog despite the front page being a news page, I rather think that the journals are blogs because they're about personal interests and events, while Slashdot is a news site. I don't really see a reason to classify an entire domain as a blog or not.
Google has never called their service that anywhere.
How precise are trademarks anyway?
Especially since this is just about a single letter, it seems silly to me that G-Mail would restrict usage of GMail, gMAIL, etc... Heck, the "G" in both cases doesn't even mean the same.
Since you'll likely be using these programs anyway, why would you want another program?
I'm sure the parent knew there was alternatives, what he was saying is that Google focus on Windows apps. What alternatives you have is totally besides the point here. Just because Microsoft Office doesn't exist for Linux, doesn't excuse Microsoft just because OpenOffice exist as an alternative.
Now, when Firefox notice there's an update available, the user gets a dialog telling there's an update, asking "do you wish to close Firefox and install it now? (otherwise it'll install next time you start Firefox)"
I think the "problem" with Firefox 1.0 was that it wasn't caching the DOM tree, and given how complex that beast can turn out to implement (code can for example modify their own DOM on the fly whenever they feel like), it's not really surprising to me.
I think Firefox 1.5 is basically as fast as Opera on this now, so it's nice to see one of Opera's killer features in Firefox.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow... WMF?! That won't be in another version, that'll be in another app.
It just goes to prove that any popular software worth hacking that has security vulnerabilities will eventually have to deal with live working exploits.
What can I say? I pity the administrator that need "proof" to realize this.
Straight to the "Security 101" class you go, as you should have before getting a job.
Or if not having one, thank god for that.
As you can see, the facade that Firefox is the cure to the Internet Explorer security blues is quickly fading.
Here's the hard facts according to Secunia...
IE 6: 19 of 85 unpatched issues, the most severe classed Highly Critical.
Firefox 1.x: 3 of 22 unpatched issues, the most severe classed Less Critical.
Opera 8.x: 0 of 7 unpatched issues.
I don't know about you, but as long as a product is auto-updating (which the Firefox 1.5 beta and onwards indeed is, like IE 6, and unlike Opera 8), what does it matter how many exploits are found? Isn't it how many issues you're affected by that matters?
Yes, this was a problem with Firefox before 1.5 as you can't excuse having to manually upgrade your browser while monitoring security sites (at least not from the audience Firefox is targeting), and that's why I recommend people to upgrade to 1.5 ASAP. The minor instabilities still present from being in beta isn't as bad as missing out security fixes.
Paris should get 11 years for her acting ability
So you cared about her *acting* ability in that vid?
Err...
We're talking about the same flick, right?!
Hmm, my comment on that post would depend on if that was just a word play on Apple's Rosetta technology or not. :-s
In other words, Microsoft Drops AES?
Man, I'm so confused now.
OK, you can stop throwing
And here's an actual example if anyone's interested:a mazonwishwatch.php
http://www.joemarini.com/tutorials/tutorialpages/
Sparkle is vector based XAML system for doing applications that may have traditionaly been done in flash
It's primarly to do Windows apps though (to aid in developing for the new Windows Graphics Framework model). I rarely see Flash used for Windows application development. Sure, it happens, but far from often.
I had to check this up with MS since I still don't at all recall NT 4 being called Cairo.
Here's what I found a guy had to say.
With my memory refreshed from that, it seems like Cairo is more of a vision than a product. I guess that's where I got into thinking it became Windows 2000, as it has some techs from it, although I stand corrected and you're right some got in as early as NT 4, but NT 4 never had a codename according to MS, and I haven't seen anything saying the WinFS service itself being delayed from NT4 to Vista.
Yeah, but Opera does that to people by switching to a different skin. Changing the UI is not worth a new OS release.
;-)
.NET 2.0 is going to get finished in November this year, which WinFX builds upon. I don't really see where the sudden delay would come from, and I'm reading Microsoft's statement as it'll have a similar schedule as Vista:
.NET Framework.
It's not the UI, it's how you work with your computer, to put it simple. I couldn't find where to place my documents in the appropriate way first. Opera? What do you mean? And I wasn't saying the UI alone warranted a new OS release. Please don't put words in my mouth.
Ummm... isn't that just a rehash of "Recent Documents" in 98?
Recent documents is one of the virtual folders that exist, yes (although I don't recall the filters for that one, if it's now just actual *documents* or other files too), but you have a lot of such folders, and it's not really clear which contents belong to a single author or many either. It's often virtual folders in subfolders of other virtual folders as well. I think I'm starting to get it now with a "Library" virtual folder being for the local machine, and a "User's Files" for the user. But if you don't pay attention, you may be looking in a "Documents" virtual folder that covered all for the machine when you thought you were in one for just the user. Bah, it's hard to explain, and I think you need to use it yourself to see what I mean. The thing is that they're so flexible (unifying and splitting by author is just one of the fields, another folder can be "mp3 music of 2004", containing files only one user put in 10 different real folders). It's folders with an intelligence, and I can imagine that going completely over the head of many novices, especially if they don't set a filter right and have to call support wondering why they can't find their files in a folder.
A new indexing system is good, but again, that was something I was expecting in SP2.
OK, and some expected it in 2000, etc. I don't see your point here. When it do arrive, it still makes for a big change, no? Or is it a less of a big change for Windows users when they get it in 2006 instead of 2003? Most Windows users still haven't experienced this system, and that has to define how big change it'll appear to them after all.
But WinFX isn't even coming with Vista... its coming two years later in a patch that goes on Vista, XP AND 2000....
Yes, it's being backported to aid in the transition and early adopters. The intended platform for these techs are Vista though according to docs, and I'm pretty sure MS will do something to enforce that as well.
As for release estimates, yours seem a bit strange, as Microsoft released WinFX Beta 1 in parallel with Vista beta 1, and
WinFX is Windows Vista's managed-code programming model, building on and extending the
It wouldn't make much sense for them to release Vista's development model two years later. Microsoft has to want people to develop for their OS, right? Are you confusing with WinFS? That's been said to come later, and also being backported.
Yes, for reasons I posted before, I think Linux could gain some advantage over Windows even after Vista goes retail. It's an OS with so many changes, people won't exactly switch overnight.
As long as Linux devs can offer a desktop competitive with e.g. OS X pretty "soon" (hey, and hopefully better!), things could get a bit interesting, if it has a strong unified application suite. Newbies can easily get lost. And yeah, I still strongly believe it isn't there. I guess it has 4-5 years from now before Vista adoption can slowly start to kick in for real.
When Vista adopters have overcome its differences from other OS'es and got used to its incompatible application development, Linux could get a harder time if it hasn't moved on the OS usage share ladder by then.
I'm right now most curious in how KDE 4 / Plasma will end up working like. That seems to for once not be a simply basic and incremental desktop release for Linux.
10 years? You're nuts...
This was a feature planned for Cairo, i.e. what ended up as Windows 2000. It wasn't planned for Windows 95. But still, yes, it didn't end up in 2K or in XP, but it's about to arrive now. So...? Priorities change, and I can easily see a major OS generation or two being skipped before returning on a concept. It's probably happening with all operating systems to some extent.
Well, beta 1 of WinFS has been released taking it out of its vaporware state, so I wouldn't say "can't make it". Last thing I heard it'll be available around the time of Vista's release, possibly shortly after.
Hmm, I don't understand this joke. :-s
.NET framework based. A side effect is that you can no longer develop in C++, in that case you need to use Managed C++, which is very much incompatible with regular C++, with even new keywords introduced like "gcnew" for "garbage collected new" and "^" for a garbage collected pointer, etc.
.NET Framework 2.0 (not out yet), and three recently announced products which didn't even have a counterpart before. Then you can start developing Avalon (a new API) apps in XAML (a new language) and a .NET language of choice. No, simple C or C++ won't do it at all, it's totally incompatible. You need e.g. VB .NET, C#, J#, or Managed C++.
;-) This is an OS I think administrators will fear of rolling out due to its changes, not to speak of its new hardware requirements because it heavily uses the GPU as a desktop renderer (another not too tiny change btw).
I suppose you haven't used the latest versions of Vista? I was just doing it and is totally confused by the new Explorer UI, and I'm pretty used to working with Windows. I can't imagine what Vista similar to this form will do to my mom. When others seem to be trying to simplify, MS sure is going the other way.
For example, if you go to Documents from the Start Menu, you're seamlessly put in a virtual folder. Not really a physical one where the files are, but a folder based on a file search. The files there can be in several different places, but you don't really notice easily as the searches are now instnataneous thanks to the new indexer (a good thing in all this mess). So then you try to go to your *real* documents folder and find it's in a completely restructured place (hint: Documents and Settings is no more in Vista). And there you have the changes involved when you just try to go to a folder.
It's really, really, a lot of changes in this build, feels like more to me than going from NT4 -> 2000 actually.
And that's just the end-user thing. What's in there for devs? Well, an entirely new development API from scratch -- WinFX is there to succeed Win32, and it's anything but similar, don't even think of having it being backwards compatible. While Win32 was C libraries, this is
I'm actually starting to believe Microsoft may be introducing *too much* stuff in Vista at once for devs and end-users alike. To develop Windows Vista apps, you're best off in using Visual Studio 2005 (not out yet),
So don't come here and tell me there can't be much smaller changes.
I suddenly got an urge to play a game of Global Thermonuclear War. >:-(
I'm guessing this is Yahoo's answer to gmail. If so where is my 2Gig mail box.
With all the features Gmail like POP3 has for free, is a mailbox over 1 GB all you're looking for?
Firefox usually end up with that behavior as well as domain names rank very highly on Google; with Firefox it's more like you get the additional benefit with some intelligence to it as well. If I for example wish to check the latest Firefox builds, I can just type burning edge, and it will take me to the actual site, and not www.burningedge.com. (which, of course, is an ad domain) If I on the other hand type arstechnica, it indeed takes me to www.arstechnica.com, just like Opera would.
Of course, there are rare exceptions, but the nice part is they're very rare, so I usually just end up benefitting from the extra advantages from its intelligence.
I'm not completely sure why you replied to my post, but if it was to say Slashdot is a blog despite the front page being a news page, I rather think that the journals are blogs because they're about personal interests and events, while Slashdot is a news site. I don't really see a reason to classify an entire domain as a blog or not.
I always took them as a personal web log of one or more parts of your life.
That would make Slashdot: no, Borland: no, angsty kid: yes.
...but it looks as though they've thrown every bit of GUI common practice and standardization out of the window.
What are you talking about?
You're talking about the company that set standards, not follow them!
Their service is referenced everywhere as G-Mail.
Google has never called their service that anywhere.
How precise are trademarks anyway?
Especially since this is just about a single letter, it seems silly to me that G-Mail would restrict usage of GMail, gMAIL, etc... Heck, the "G" in both cases doesn't even mean the same.
Since you'll likely be using these programs anyway, why would you want another program?
I'm sure the parent knew there was alternatives, what he was saying is that Google focus on Windows apps. What alternatives you have is totally besides the point here. Just because Microsoft Office doesn't exist for Linux, doesn't excuse Microsoft just because OpenOffice exist as an alternative.
Someone yelling "I'm going to fucking kill Harvard" was also heard echoing in the building...
However, I'd personally ask Google.
And maybe better yet for tricky questions requiring expert input: Google Answers.
This, however, is solved in Firefox 1.5.
Now, when Firefox notice there's an update available, the user gets a dialog telling there's an update, asking "do you wish to close Firefox and install it now? (otherwise it'll install next time you start Firefox)"
I think the "problem" with Firefox 1.0 was that it wasn't caching the DOM tree, and given how complex that beast can turn out to implement (code can for example modify their own DOM on the fly whenever they feel like), it's not really surprising to me.
I think Firefox 1.5 is basically as fast as Opera on this now, so it's nice to see one of Opera's killer features in Firefox.